Discussion Results and Discussion

The 2nd International Conference on Science, Technology, and Humanity ISSN: 2477-3328 227 Figure 11. The students’ enthusiasm to give responses. Some students seemed enthusiastic in giving response to the presentation. One of them was a new “face”. Both groups at the front gave “counter attack” to any “attack” from the audiences. However, as ever before, the members in the presenting groups did not distribute the performance evenly. From the questionnaire administered at the end of the Lesson Study, several findings have emerged. First, in relation with randomized topic for group presentation item no. 1 out of 16 sample students, 1γ gave positive response to the use of lottery. A student commentedμ “In my opinion, it is good, as it is the fairest way”. For presentation turn taking item no. β, there were two opinions. Approximately 50 of the students stated that on the spot choice for the presenting groups was the appropriate step . A student wroteμ “... it encourages all groups to be ready for presentation”. The other 50 gave negative comments, such as to cause the tension in the class. In relation with effectiveness item no. 3, as many as 14 students gave positive responses. A student notedμ “.... more challenge to learn and master the material”. In the meanwhile, in regard with presentation intelligibility, five students stated they had not understood the other groups’ presentation. It was likely that most groups did not maximize the member participation in preparing the material and presentation. Result of mid-term test indicated that the average score only reached 51.2. Around fifteen percent of the students achieved “Good” scores. The majority 7β.7 of the students obtained scores considered as “moderate”. The rest, 1β.7, were categorized to “Poor”. This means that, in overall, the students’ material mastery was still unsatisfactory. From the questionnaires, it can be explained that some students did not understand the other groups’ presentation due to the complexity. Observations also indicated the students’ shortage in preparation for the presentation, especially in the beginning. However, the problem has gradually disappeared.

3.2. Discussion

In regard to the implementation of the course in the previous semester and feedback elicited through questionnaires, it can be inferred that the course implementation still faced several shortcomings that needed solution for a better learning practice. Those weaknesses included the poor use of instructional media and the inadequate practical learning tasks. The 2nd International Conference on Science, Technology, and Humanity ISSN: 2477-3328 228 Problem in the use of power point and LCD projector as teaching media lied in the fact that slides were filled up with text, that implied limited mastery or presentation preparation – “hiding” behind slides. In the meanwhile, the absence of practical learning tasks such as field- work assignments were assumed to have led to an idea that the course was too much abstract, conceptual, and theoretical. Learningpresentation material was gathered by the students by themselves from resource and reference books. In general, groups presented the material conceptually in the way they obtained it from the sources, thus, there were possibilities that it would be uneasy for other students to understand the material. As a consequence, students might sit listening to the presentation attentively. However, when QA session was begun, only one to three of them addressed low quality questions. A few criticisms from students in the pre-intervention period were difficult to accept. While they criticised the scoring system, the teacher so far had adopted certain criteria when to assess and score to ensure objectivity, as agreed in prior to the teaching and learning process. The students had to submit papers on the first day before they made presentation, it was intended to reach objectivity in the assessment across groups of students, as well as to encourage them to get involved since the beginning of the process. In conjunction to the aim of the study, i.e. to improve student participation in Research in Language Teaching 2 course, some findings had emerged.

a. The InformationMaterial Gathering